W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2000

[Fwd: [webwatch] How is access defined?]

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 13:34:32 -0800
Message-ID: <38A48068.904ED57C@gorge.net>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Rather than posting this to GL, let's talk more about this here so we
can try to be clearer about the factors that go into framing an answer
to the very cogent questions Rick raises.

-- 
Love.
            ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
http://dicomp.pair.com

attached mail follows:


I find that a lot of questions relating to accessibility are hard to
figure out.  Here are some examples:

1.  Some sites use Javascript.  Internet Explorer has no trouble with
these.  However, Lynx finds nothing.  Is this site accessible or not, and
should they be considered accessible from a government.

2.  Many pages use tables.  A good example would be the TV Guide page or
bus schedules.  JFW 3.5 does a good job with tables. Lynx, and even older
versions of IE with screen readers, can't render them properly.  Are they
accessible.

3.  Many sites are accessible, but they are tedious to get around.  Are
they accessible?

Should accessibility stadards assume that one has access to cutting edge
technology, be useful by any browser and screen reader, or somewhere in
between?

Rick Roderick, 
Louisville, KY
richard@iglou.com
Received on Friday, 11 February 2000 16:32:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:47 GMT